Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Am I in trouble?
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
nissandrvr
I got a standard form saying I had done 62 in a 50 on a motorway at around october in south wales.  I sent a letter back asking for the evidence and got 2 photos back of video evidence and it said I had 7 days to fill in the s172.

I sent another letter back saying that the picture does not show the driver can you please send me the video and calibration certificate to help me further.

Today I received the following (a summary of the letter)
It is not for the police to record the driver only the vehicle details

Having all the car details a notice is served on the registered keeper.  Failure to supply this information renders him liable to prosecution.

Consequently, papers will be subm,itted to the crown prosecution service recommending prosecution for failing to supply this information and a summons will be issued in due course informing you of the date, time and venue of the hearing.

A copy of the calibration certificate is enclosed.

The calibration certificate says Tele-traffic (UK) ltd

certificate of conformity "xx" (date here) january 2004

LTI 20-20 TS/M speedscope speed measuring device

this instrument conforms blah blah bah

Should I send a PACE witness statement back ASAP recorded mail or will this not help me in wales?
OU812
QUOTE (nissandrvr)
Should I send a PACE witness statement back ASAP recorded mail or will this not help me in wales?


It sounds like its too late for that I'm afraid (what was the date of the last NIP and S172 form you have been sent?) and I'm amazed that you got the calibration certs out of them at this stage (shouldnt really be able to get your hands on them until the summons has been issued and your initially plead not guilty)

Have you received a summons yet?
nissandrvr
I got the original NIP a couple of days after, about the start of november.

I then about a week or two later got the second letter back in about 2 weeks by this time the first 30 days where over and I had seven days to reply.  I said that I could not tell the driver from the photographs please send me the video to refresh my memory.

Now I have recieved this letter about 2 months from the incident.

I have not recieved a summons yet.

Do you believe I should give them a ring and tell them I will send the s172 ASAP.  It is in the office but I am back in work on monday, really worried now.
OU812
If you send the completed S172 now you might get a fixed penalty offer or it might have no effect and you'll get a summons for S172 anyway (they may well accept it though since they prefer people to take fixed penalties, but may summons you if they think youre just trying to mess them about)

If you get the fixed penalty and ignore it you'll get a summons (for speeding this time not for failing to identify) somewhen over a month later

If you send back a PACE statement instead of S172 (which is the preferred reply to a NIP around these boards) I'd think they'd be more likely to summons you for S172 because you failed to identify within the allowed timeframe (and probably dont have a good reason why you didnt)
Talion
What about if in this type of situation a letter was sent explaining,

ok I cant ID the driver from the photo, here is alist of possible drivers, which would you suggest I name ?

The object, if reported for S172, you stand up in court and read out the communications followed by the bit of law thats says
" (B) the person on whom the notice is served shall not be guilty of an offence under this section if he shows either that he gave the information as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of that period or that it has not been reasonably practicable for him to give it."

ok whoever would need to do the para4 bit about going through recipts etc ..
OU812
I think the problem here is that the S172 28 days expired on or around the same time the photo request occured. The photos came with a 7 days extension (which presumably have expired) and the last letter to them basically tells them that the driver cannot be identified and asks for all the calibration etc.

Unfortunately asking for the calibration etc is only 'useful' for either fighting the case or getting it dropped (in the event that something was 'wrong') - neither of these would be concern for someone who wasnt driving, and neither are a concern for answering S172 - because of this its pretty resonably to assume that the request is from the driver and/or they are just trying to mess the scammers around

Which is why I think that a PACE statement would result in an S172 summons anyway on the grounds that the request was not answered in the specified time, but a fully compelted [albeit late] S172 form might result in the issue of a fixed penalty (but potentially much harder to fight if the fixed penalty was ignored)
nissandrvr
Thanks for your help guys, I think I will eat humble pie on the phone to them on monday and cross my fingers that they do not take me to court.

I did mess them about a bit as was a little bit miffed about getting done on a motorway at 60 in a 50.  I think I should have just s172ed when they sent the photos.
cjm99
May I suggest that you contact the court for the offence area, and ask if 'informations have been laid' against you. If they have, then further contact with the Scam office will only strengthed thier case not only for a s172 but probably, if you indicate you were the driver, a speeding conviction also!!
nissandrvr
I just gave them a ring and they said if I send them the 172 in the next couple of days then they will not prosecute me for being late supplying the driver details.  I asked them if they have recorded the details of the phone call and they said yes smile.gif so I should just get my license ruined with 3 points rather then having to go to court which would be bad.

I think its time I gave up unfortunatly, I believe I got more then 60 quids worth of paper work time out of them now.  I understand that if I wanted to give them a bit more to think about/try to get away with the offence that I should have sent them a witness statement after recieving the second letter.  Because of this mistake they have got something by me.

It was the stretch of motorway m4 that used to be 70 lowered to 50 IMO incorrectly.  I also found there website quite offensive www.checkyourspeed.org.uk with a camera winking and smiling in the corner.
OU812
QUOTE (nissandrvr)
Thanks for your help guys, I think I will eat humble pie on the phone to them on monday and cross my fingers that they do not take me to court.

I did mess them about a bit as was a little bit miffed about getting done on a motorway at 60 in a 50.  I think I should have just s172ed when they sent the photos.


Failry sure that an S172 reply has to be in writing (and signed!), I suppose there might be miliage in phoning them to see if they'd accept an S172 reply this late in the game - but I agree with CJM, phone the court first because if they have already laid info against you there is little point (and you might give them more rope to hang you with)

If they are willing to accept an S172 you could consider sending the PACE statement (see the sticky thread for info) but I have a feeling that they might just go right for S172 if you do because they would feel you were 'taking the mick' and could probably ignore the PACE statement since it was 'out of time' (others might care to comment on this)

Unless you can get them to accept a PACE statement I'm afraid it looks like its a lost cause - unless you know something's amiss with the charge against you or you just want a fight and hope they cock up on proceedure (this does happen but would almost definately go to court at that point though....)
Talion
to be honest I cant see what you gotta lose, either way it's still 3 points and with a PACE statement there's a chance of none, but having gone to court a few  times now it seems quite duanting
Divbad
Interesting position to find yourself in.

IMO, they could say that you should have asked for calibration certificates at the same time you asked for the photos. I would think the Mags will have some sympathy with this.

One could counter this if, for example, the reason for asking for the photos was to confirm the vehicle & driver, as there was a suspicion in the RK's mind that the car was even there.

Upon receipt of the pictures, the RK then realises that it was RK's car. Then the RK questioned whether the recorded speed is accurate because, e.g. he's fairly sure that he had not authorised anyone to go so fast in his car, and was pretty sure he doesn't speed.

RK also didn't want to be arsey with the CTO & wanted to co-operate. He certainly didn't want to have them rooting around for paperwork if he had no reason to think it mattered at that stage  :wink:

DPP v Jones tells us that a letter will suffice in satisfying s172. A PACE statement would be even better because it also complies .

Now comes the trick: get the CTO to confirm in writing (or email) that they will not pursue the s172 charge on condition that they get the information they have requested. Setting out the "mitigation" above might persuade them that you are serious & genuine. Even if they don't, at least there's the mitigation all ready to bring into evidence.

As soon as that is in your hot little hands, fire up the PACE-o-matic and sit back.  8)
nissandrvr
Thanks for your advice, but I dont want to go any futher this time its my first 3 points.  I will be happy with not going to court as that can be a real lottery I have been told by my uncle who is an ex lawyer (he left after 2 years because he thinks the system stinks and did not believe in what he was doing) I will learn to be more careful with my dealings in future if im unlucky, and there is a strong possibility of that as it is so easy to go over the speed limit in a nissan turbo (it leads you in to a false sense of security no doubt like many big cars) never had this trouble in my old polluting diesel.

I dont drive fast and am often the first to be overtaken by white van man in built up areas, but often like a spirited drive where I believe its sensible, just really hate speed cameras in these sort of places.  Lowering the speed limits by 20mph just so they can put cameras up  icon_twisted.gif they really take the mick.

edit - also sorry for originally putting this message in wrong forum, noobs eh
nissandrvr
Looking at the picture there is another car touching the side of the number plate ie just on the edge of the cross hairs and the picture is a fair way away.  It was an LTI 20-20 machine.  I have just read the article on this piece of kit wrt range.  As a chartered electronic engineer for the ministry of defence I suppose my word would be ok regarding specifications of equipment and usage... hmm I wonder

I will fill out the s172 that should keep them happy wrt the driver, but I may enquire further about this.

I will get the picture scanned and posted up monday.
nigeldunne64
Nissandrvr, As you say keep them happy by giving them the S172 details and ensure that they confirm that S172 has ben complied with. Then you get time to decide if you want to accept the Conditional Offer they will offer you.
As you say it was an LTi 20/20 that "caught" you - and who knows it may have been operated by a civilian. So get the S172 out of the way and then decide if you are up for a fight over the speeding allegation. Then you can start having more fun knowing worst case scenario is a few extra pounds in fine and costs IF they ever get you to Court. But most of us on here know that when you start questioning their evidence and procedures they have a habit of forgetting to actually get the summons to you  :wink:
Bluedart
nigeldunne64
wrote
QUOTE
But most of us on here know that when you start questioning their evidence and procedures they have a habit of forgetting to actually get the summons to you  

Well said nigeldunne64, but remember, when things get awkward for the stazi, they put it this way.
If at the end of the day our procedures produce no evidence, then we must get into the habit of "forgetting", full stop. Very convenient to say the least.

Peter
nigeldunne64
Peter, as you know I'm ex Devon and Cornwall and VERY well versed with their scammers unit. I actually had one ticket go to summons stage when unsigned forms were still working. The young lady involved went not guilty and had her case adjourned three times without explanation - though they did know I was coming as her McKenzie Friend. The last adjournment was nearly a year ago now with no new date set yet.
Perhaps they have forgotten this one as well  :!:
TheSaint
If the keep adjurning a case, then set no new re-trial date, could they "hold it on a back burner" until another case of the same type (e.g. PACE) has gone through? Then depending on the outcome of that case magically give new trial dates to all the relevant parties?

Smacks of unfair to me!
Bluedart
The Saint wrote
QUOTE
If the keep adjurning a case, then set no new re-trial date, could they "hold it on a back burner" until another case of the same type (e.g. PACE) has gone through? Then depending on the outcome of that case magically give new trial dates to all the relevant parties?

I think there could be a bit of "abuse of process" flying around.

Peter
cjm99
Article 6 ECHR guarantees all citizens a right to trial within a reasonable time. European case law fixes the maximum at two years for these type of offences. Read JackieA posts on the subject.
nissandrvr
biggrin.gif  Managed to get this to time out, got one last threatening letter on the 6 month point saying they would take no futher action.

2 weeks later i.e now.
- woke up sunny day, headed out to classic car show
- Out of town dual carriage way, no cars on road nice and sunny 2 miles away from nearest house
- Spot van with rear window open full of darth vader looking equipment
- Look down at speedo 60 mph indicated, look at sign 50 DOH! break to 30 and crawl past
- Now awaiting fine, when will I learn **goes for cry  :oops:

I will go for the pictures and try the same again, ie annoying them with letters, but am not hopeful, I will pay this time.  At least I will have 3 points on my license rather then 6, time to invest in roadangel  :twisted:
Lance
If you get an NIP, you could consider returning the PACE statement. icon_idea.gif
nissandrvr
I will give it a go but it doesnt seem to work for some people reading the forums ie they still end up in cort.  Plus I dont really understand what you need to do for it.

Ie- do you send it straight away or do you ask for photo first
and do you completely fill out the NIP and then attach the pace witness statement?

I am an engineer and dont really understand law stuff still confuses me  :oops:
superstoater
nissandrvr,

Firstly, don't panic - there's a chance that the NIP won't show up.  If your speedo was showing 60 you were probably doing more like 56-58 - certainly still enough to "do" you, but it's not a foregone conclusion.  Also, if it was dual carriageway, there's no guarantee that they were targetting your car before you had time to brake.

Having said that, you should accept that it's very likely you'll get the NIP, so you should be prepared.

As soon as it arrives, open it (keep the envelope, making a note of whether or not it's first class), then read and post the details here (in the format suggested in the "READ THIS FIRST!" thread).

There are templates for PACE letters on this site, but when you've got those details we'll be able to advise you better.

The important thing to remember is that they give you 28 days to reply - whatever your reply, make it Special Delivery to arrive the 28th day.  As you've already discovered, delays are your friend.
Lance
QUOTE (nissandrvr)
I am an engineer
You may be interested to know that engineering is well-represented among the members of this site.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.